amb
-
Posts
44 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by amb
-
-
I dont have all of the specifics but i will answer what i can from what my understanding of reading the parts of the Manuals we have available is.
Lets start with the Nr.1
There are multiple different range modes available for the display.
Ranging from 15km to 120 km
(with the different ranges being 15,30,60,120)
Though the effective range most likely depend on what the radar is used for.
For example terrain scanning (of significant changes in terrain) and spotting larger ships should be possible at long ranges (100km + depending on weather etc)
Where as spotting smaller details and Aircraft would most likely be limited to shorter ranges.
And for the Nr.2
This would depend on the radar elevation or depression used.
For all the search modes there were standard elevations / depressions depending on exact modes / altitudes but it was also possible to manually elevate or depress the radar antenna.
The standard antenna elevation settings according to the manual for air-ground search modes were between -3,0 and -0,5 degrees depending on the range selected and the altitude flown amd can be found on page 28.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVeNzI2a3laZnBiZXM/view
So since the default antenna elevations are pretty shallow even at lower altitude a reasonable amount of sky will be scanned (if the terrain is flat enough) and any RWR within that area will likely be pinged.
Awesome! Thanks!
-
1) The max distance displayed on the radar screen is 120km. The altitude of the airplane hasn't any effect except for larger parts of the scan area might be "in radar-shade" when flying low so you of course have a better and larger view high up. The picture is aligned with the ground so the attitude of the aircraft matters as the gimbal-range of the radar dish would restrict you from viewing terrain that is close (when pitching up) or far away (when pitching down).
2) Other aircrafts within the scan zone would get a beep on their RWR even though you are in air-to-ground mode. There is also the possibility you might pick out low flying aircrafts while in terrain-mapping mode.
Thank you! That's very helpful.
So it should be fairly safe to use the radar if you're flying low, the only ones who would pick you up on their RWR would be the ones flying even lower than you, or basically on the same height.
-
I'm wondering about some things regarding the scan area of the radar, like how far ahead does it look? And does this vary with altitude or how does that work? Does it scan straight ahead in A2G mode or is it always pointed down by some degree?
If you're flying very low it seems that it should do a scan straight ahead in order to be able to give you useful picture, but if you're flying higher up that would of course not be necessary, so does the aircraft adjust this automatically based on altitude or how does that work?
Basically the two main things I'm wondering about is:
1) How big of a distance ahead is scanned by the radar (and does this vary with altitude)?
2) Will I be able to safely keep scanning in A2G mode without having to be afraid of showing up on other peoples RWRs? Given that they are flying on the same or higher altitude than me.
-
I would prefer sticking to realistic loadouts only :)
Seconded.
-
What is that vertical stick next to the throttle on the left in the Draken cockpit? It's not for RB05 is it? I didn't think the Draken could carry that...
-
There's an illustration where one aircraft (of 4) carried jamming and counter measure pods and jam an enemy fleet's radar whilst 3 AJS-37 split off to carry out a 'pop up' attack. The quantity of chaff carried wasn't just for self defence but also part of a EW attack strategy.
Thanks! That's really interesting...
So am I interpreting this correctly when I say that the strategy here is to let the ships see your flight of 4, but then at the same time as 3 of them breaks of (and dives below the radar I presume), the 4th on starts dispensing chaff and the chaff will make it sort of look like there's still multiple aircraft in that flight (chaff creating the false signatures), so the ships will (hopefully) think the attack is coming from one direction but then suddenly the 3-flight pops up from another direction and launches. Is that about it?
Pretty cool if so... I just wonder what kind of benefit this would give, I know nothing about naval maneuvers/tactics but a wild guess would be that perhaps ships will form up a certain way to defend against an attack from a certain direction, so putting the ships with the strongest countermeasure- and AA-systems in front and keeping the ships you want to protect in the rear? So this would be a nice move around that then... just guessing wildly though
Too bad you can't use chaff in this way in DCS, to create false radar signatures I mean.
-
540 chaff and 28 flare seems very heavily biased towards chaff... my best guess is that maybe it was standard practice to more or less continuously dispense chaff while in a hostile zone? As in whenever you are pained by radar you just dispense chaff at a fixed rate all the time?
I know the viggen had some sort of auto-system for doing this tied into the RWR, so maybe that's how that worked - as soon as RWR detects something it dispenses chaff at a certain rate, perhaps at a greater rate if locked up? I'm just guessing...
While I guess flares would only be used during the attack run itself...?
-
I really don't think this is the case. Tirak probably has it right, LNS feels that they have to "sell" the Viggen module more than the F-14 and is waiting till they can do that right.
Cobra said in a prior post: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2486926&postcount=1252 - that after the MiG-21 they decided to change their announcement scheme. However, they decided to announce the Tomcat because they didn't want a really prolonged period without talking about any future products. Also, there was so much excitement about the Tomcat once they started hinting that it made sense to formalize it (IMHO).
With the Viggen, they also need much more than just the aircraft to "complete the experience" which LNS has mentioned many times in other posts. Especially for those users who don't frequent the forum (and are less obsessed than us...) they need to have a really intriguing package to draw people in. Especially since other aircraft coming this year are the Hornet, Spitfire, and F-5E; these are pretty famous aircraft.
But offering a package that involves a theater, etc will really shift the balance. If anything, all of these ancillaries are a big part of the hold up, not some sort of internal strife. ;)
I'm a worrier by nature, but luckily these are not the things that I'm worried about. ED has already said that the Viggen should happen in the first half of 2016: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2659915&postcount=13
That should give you some confidence, they aren't open about release dates either.
My 2 cents,
-Nick
Cool, thanks! :thumbup:
-
Well I'm totally psyched about the Viggen. The F-14 too, it was my favourite as a kid, such a huge beautiful bird, just stunning. I really hope someone buys the guys at LN cake and/or beer whenever they release these things.
It's a good thing I'm getting too old to play very much, otherwise I would probably fly 24/7 after release.
-
Alright mate, put the tin hat away. The tomcat is what you might call very popular, announcing it as their next big project created a huge amount of buzz for LN, but it's also a way down the line project. The Viggen is not nearly as popular and was supposed to come out last year. As such, when they announced the Viggen, they wanted to do it with a lot of fanfare, videos, pictures, FAQs ect, because unlike the tomcat, who's name itself generates hype, the viggen was going to have to be sold to people.
Delays in the project due to whatever reason have forced them to push back their schedule. They still want to do that big fanfare announcement, they're just not as ready as they thought they were, and since everyone already knows its the Viggen, they might as well wait for the announcement to be the big show they wanted it to be.
I see your point and there's no need to be rude.
-
Because the F-14 has been officially announced by leatherneck.
the Viggen has not.
It was leaked backed in november and leatherneck has Acknowledged that it was true.
But they still have not made their official announcement with pictures and stuff etc.
When they do it will get its own forum.
And since most likely it will be close to release it will probably be avaliable for pre-order right away when it announced.
Well sure, but that begs the question: Why was the F-14 announced such a long way before its release date while at the same time they are so reluctant to announce the Viggen even now?
It makes no sense. If I were a suspicious person I might start guessing that maybe there's some sort of internal conflict between the Viggen team and the rest of LN which puts some uncertainty on wether the Viggen will actually be released under the LN name or not, thus they don't want to announce it under that name until they know how it's going to be.
I don't really think that is the case, but this lack of information just makes the imagination run wild...
-
The thing which strikes me as strange is why the F-14 has got its own forum and all when the Viggen is supposedly closer to release...
-
Can we have an ETA for when the ETA for the announcement for the ETA of the release will be? I'm thinking in the ballpark of july?
I love you
-
The reverser doors start closing when the main gear is compressed, but will abort if the nose gear is not compressed 2 seconds later. So that would account for your missing ~2 seconds. At least that's what I have understood from previous discussion. :-)
That would explain it! I had understood it as that it didn't start to close before the front gear touched down. Thanks! :)
-
I found a short sequence in this video which I think is interesting:
[ame]
[/ame]The interesting part is that according to the manual it should take about 5 seconds for the thrust reverser to fully close, but I'm counting at most about 3 seconds from the moment the front gear compresses to we getting a view of the rear - and seeing that the reverser already looks fully closed...
Thoughts?
Edit: The timestamping doesn't work when embedding for some reason. But the part I'm talking about is at about 1:28
-
Holy Cow :shocking: RC-Impeller???
Yes :)
You can find the kit here: http://www.mbs-rcmodels.se/skalamodeller/
I can highly recommend it to anyone who likes to do builds like these. The instructions are clear enough even for a total rookie like me and the guy who owns the shop - which is the same guy who designed the kits - is a super nice guy who's very happy to help, so if you run into any problems you can just call him.
Personally I think I'm finding out that doing these kinds of builds is probably not my thing :) But that's just me, and I still intend to finish this one... one day :)
-
Getting so hyped about the Viggen I decided to build one (Ja37 but still).
I wonder if I'll finish it before LNS releases it. :D
Cool! I'm building a Draken, although it's been standing still for quite some time now...
-
I agree, modelling the most iconic variants of aircraft makes the most sense to me. I'd rather see aircraft in their most operated configurations
My thoughts exactly! It seems to me that there's a bit of a tendency to choose the latest/greatest and most upgraded version of an aircraft (or other vehicle) when modelling them in a computer game, and I think that's a shame since it's not very historical. You just end up having battles between obscure models that are then really just fantasy battles that have little to do with how it might have been in reality.
I'm not saying that DCS is the worst offender when it comes to this, but that might be largely because the latest and greatest versions are often still classified to some extent.
-
Slightly off-topic, but if there was to be a JA 37 in the future, which version of it would you guys prefer?
I'm leaning towards the JA 37C since although it's not the most capabale version, I feel like it's probably the most representative of what the JA 37's were (for the most part of their life) since it had the original cockpit and electronics - but in their most upgraded version. Although a JA 37D would be really cool as well, it's almost a bit more like a Gripen in disguise with its new central computer, large LCD-screens and AIM-120's.
What do you guys think?
-
Plus, if I understood it correctly, the hydraulics used for the thrust reverser are pretty slow so it takes about 5 seconds for them to fully close/open. So even if there wasn't anything preventing you from using it in mid-air it would be quite difficult to do so effectively because of this.
-
I don't care a huge amount about this - I think it's kind of fine either way, but I just want to say that things like this makes me worry a little bit, because it's a very slippery slope... If you start doing some modifications to an aircrafts capabilities for gameplay reasons then exactly where do you draw the line?
I just want DCS to stay a true simulator and not go the way of implementing unrealistic things for the sake of gameplay/balance. Call me a purist I guess. But like I said, I'm sort of okay with this modification, I just don't want this to be used as justification for more compromises regarding realism...
-
These links still work:
SFI AJS37 Part 1, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVedU5xVUR6al8tTUE/view?pref=2&pli=1
SFI AJ37 Part 2, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVeNzI2a3laZnBiZXM/view?pref=2&pli=1
Awesome! Thanks a bunch!
-
Sorry about asking again, but did anyone get a chance to grab a copy of the flight manual before the links went dead? Would be awesome if someone could re-post them somewhere else.
-
There were also problems with 3rd party devs and the SDK and the way certain parts didn't work as expected.
From this quote, I gather that the Viggen was already very advanced around new year. If assumptions are correct and LN has indeed started working on a Draken, then that must mean something in the pipeline has freed up which must be the Viggen.
Wow - what makes you say they might have started working on a Draken? What did I miss?
DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion
in DCS: AJS37 Viggen
Posted
I've always wondered about one thing, I'm not sure I should bother anyone with it, but maybe someone is bored and know a lot about aerodynamics...
So the thing is: Why is it that the Viggen seems to have such a large wing surface area, yet it doesn't seem to turn much better (any better?) than for example a F-4 Phantom which has sort of small-ish wings - or more regular sized wings one might say.
I know the wing area isn't the only thing determining lift, but I've just always wondered why they decided to design the Viggen's wings that way, with such large area. My best guess is that it has something to do with providing lots of lift at slow speeds to shorten take-offs?
I don't really have any idea what I'm talking about now, but from my layman's perspective I guess it makes sense that a large wing area with a low camber would be able to give a lot of lift at slow speeds if the alpha is high enough, while also providing relatively little drag at high speeds. Is that what's going on here or am I way off?